Too much to not share!!

Dear Mark, The CDC published data on January 19, 2022, that has enormous significance. Yet, it has not been reported on by many major news networks. So, let me explain the findings after a little context. When a person is infected by a virus and recovers it usually produces “natural immunity.” Vaccinations are designed to replicate that immunity through administering viral antigens or, in the case of the mRNA “vaccines” against SARS-CoV-2, the genetic expression of its spike protein. The problem with respiratory tract viruses like those that cause the common cold as well as SARS-CoV-2 is that they continually mutate to variants that can escape immunity whether it is from a prior infection or vaccine. The silver lining is that viruses generally want to mutate to a less lethal form. Afterall, if the virus kills the host its chance of long-term survival drops precipitously. So, the natural order of things is for even the most aggressive respiratory tract virus is to eventually become an inconvenient viral infection like the common cold. However, if a person’s immune system is not functioning properly, even a less powerful variant (like Omicron) can still produce significant illness and even death. O.K., now what I want to do here is share with you the new data from the CDC that showed that prior infection in the unvaccinated produced greater protection than full vaccination against being hospitalized with COVID-19 due to the Delta variant in California and New York from May 30 through October 31, 2021. The data is clear that the unvaccinated who had no prior history of COVID-19 were hit hard by the Delta variant. The estimated hazard rate for hospitalization was as much as nearly 20-fold greater than vaccinated individuals. But unvaccinated individuals with a prior COVID-19 infection were less likely to be hospitalized during this time period compared to vaccinated people with no prior COVID-19 infection. What about comparing the effect of vaccination in people with prior COVID-19 infection compared to those who are unvaccinated with prior infection? You can see from the graph below; the two lines are almost superimposed. Not a big difference at all. Yet the CDC still recommends “Primary vaccination, additional doses, and booster doses are recommended for all eligible persons.” Anyone who questions this recommendation is labeled as spreading misinformation, an antivaxxer, and a conspiracy theorist. That is not right. I do not consider myself any of the above. Since the beginning of this pandemic, I have tried to express clear information on where this virus likely come from, who should and should NOT be vaccinated, and how you can support your immune function whether you are vaccinated or not. Vaccination should be based upon the individual’s risk for severe COVID-19 and the benefit vs. risk with the vaccination. Those with underlying health issues and other risk factors for severe COVID-19 should get vaccinated because their risk of dying is significantly greater than the risk for a severe outcome from the vaccine. The bottom line is that there are many of the unvaccinated that should be vaccinated and there are also those that should not be vaccinated. It should be based upon the individual, not on mandates. And many of those individuals that were hospitalized or died due to COVID-19 should have been vaccinated. But the reality that even the WHO acknowledges is that we cannot vaccinate or boost our way to herd immunity and the elimination of COVID-19 with the current vaccines because they do not sufficiently prevent infection or transmission. Omicron made this statement crystal. The data is clear, the vaccines reduced hospitalizations and death. No one can really argue against that (though some will, I still get emails from people trying to convince that viruses do not exist.) But vaccination did not prevent the spread of Omicron, just look at countries with high vaccination rates. Omicron is so different than prior variants that it is basically viewed as a “new” virus by our immune system. It partially evades the immunity provided by vaccination and even prior infection because of mutations in the spike protein. And the virus will continue to change and that means we must continue to be vigilant in making our immune system well nourished, healthy, and functioning as best as it can so it can protect against new variants. So, who should be vaccinated? I wrote an article on my website titled “A Closer Look at the COVID-19 Numbers and What is to Come” that dives into the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes based upon age and comorbidities. These are guidelines on who should be vaccinated (and who should not, in my opinion). I also spoke specifically on this subject on my last COVID-19 webinar. All that I have written above is a preface to some VERY big questions/concerns. Supposedly the FDA is going to approve the vaccine very soon for children under the age of 5 years old. Is it reasonable to question the wisdom of mass vaccination of all of the young kids? I believe the answer is yes for several reasons.

• The risk of hospitalization and death due to COVID-19 in this age group is extremely low (less than 0.001%).

• The risk of adverse effects from vaccination may exceed the benefit the vaccine can offer to this age group as it relates to prevention of hospitalizations and death.

• The long-term safety of available vaccines has not been sufficiently established, especially in rapidly developing children.

• And a VERY large percentage, easily estimated at greater than 60%, of this age group has likely had a prior bout with COVID-19.

• The presence of prior infection increases the risk of an adverse event due to the vaccine.

• Vaccinating kids will not halt the pandemic.

And as the CDC data attests, since natural immunity from prior infection offers even better protection compared to those with no prior infection who are vaccinated, do ALL of these kids with prior infections need to be vaxxed? Shouldn’t we be determining prior infection status prior to vaccination? And not just by looking at antibodies, there are other aspects of immunity (e.g., T cells) that help block re-infection and severity of infection that are equally if not more important. It is not just be exposing these kids to a vaccine that may not provide much benefit, we might be doing harm by not taking natural immunity into consideration. And that is my BIG point, natural immunity should not be ignored, especially as we get ready to start giving it to rapidly developing children. It needs to be factored into medical practice and public policy. Especially since so many people of all ages have now had a prior infection. Human history is full of what seemed like a good idea at the time but turned out to be short-sighted and disastrous. This decision the FDA is about to make is huge. I hope they ask the right question: Does it really make sense to encourage mass vaccination in children under the age of five years old for an infection that is not serious or life-threatening in all but a very small percentage of children with a vaccine that is not all that effective against the transmission of the current variant of virus? I just hope they remember the first law of medicine, To Do No Harm. Thanks for reading. Sincerely,

Dr. Michael Murray P.S. I know this newsletter was a bit different than my usual focus on steps you can take to support your immune system. I just wanted to share my perspective with the hope that it might be helpful. P.P.S., if you want to look at all of the data yourself, here is the link to the CDC study.